Ö÷²¥´óÐã

Has Gen Stanley McChrystal over-stepped the mark?

The debate on the United States' future strategy in Afghanistan continues apace this week, with growing pressure on President Obama to make a decision.

Until he does, the private debate is bound to spill over into a public debate that can look like a row. Obama has two meetings this week with his top-level security team, and they will be again looking at whether to back Gen McChrystal's advice to opt for a counter-insurgency strategy, which implies nation building and more troops, or continue with a counter-terrorism strategy, apparently preferred by Vice-President Joe Biden.

The UK's Telegraph reports that Obama is "furious" with the general and that White House staff were "shocked" by a speech McChrystal . No American newspaper or network has reported any fury and his spokesman has just said that he is "comfortable" with the way the debate is going.

But it would be hardly surprising if there was some irritation in the White House. After all, the general told his London audience that pulling out would lead to "Chaosistan" and, as the debate continues in Washington, said in the speech: "Uncertainty disheartens our allies, emboldens our foe. A villager recently asked me whether we intended to remain in his village and provide security, to which I confidently promised him that, of course, we would. He looked at me and said, 'Okay, but you did not stay last time.'"

Now McChrystal's boss, Defence Secretary Robert Gates, has suggested: "It is imperative that all of us taking part in these deliberations, civilians and military alike, provide our best advice to the president, candidly but privately." Rebuke or slap-down may be journalistic shorthand, but it's hardly a ringing endorsement for McChrystal's decision to speak his mind. What should stay private, what should be public?

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?